DREF final report South Africa: Floods

Transcription

1 DREF final report South Africa: Floods DREF operation n MDRZA005 GLIDE n FL ZAF 22 December, 2011 The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent (IFRC) Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (DREF) is a source of un-earmarked money created by the Federation in 1985 to ensure that immediate financial support is available for Red Cross Red Crescent response to emergencies. The DREF is a vital part of the International Federation s disaster response system and increases the ability of National Societies to respond to disasters. Summary: CHF 236,780 was allocated from the IFRC s Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (DREF) in January 2011 to support the South Africa Red Cross Society (SARCS) in delivering immediate assistance to 1,174 households (8,870 beneficiaries) in 4 priority provinces of Free State, Limpopo, North West and Northern Cape. The DREF served a vital role in enabling immediate assistance to the most affected areas. These funds obtained significant leverage through substantial private sector contributions to a subsequent national appeal. Altogether, disaster relief operations reached 11, 774 households, or some 58, 870 individuals. An additional 125 people were trained as PHAST trainers, and 25 volunteers trained as trainers on psychosocial support. Floods that left a trail of destruction in 32 municipalities across the country in January 2011 Through the DREF, flood affected households in the Free State, Limpopo, North West, and Northern Cape province received food and non-food items in the form of s,, s, water purification sachets and, reaching 9,945 beneficiaries Limpopo had to further implement prevention measures to combat the spread of cholera outbreaks as three cases were reported. SARCS also directed its efforts towards reducing the risk of communicable and water borne diseases through various community health activities using the CBHFA approach. All volunteers involved in the DREF operation received some refresher training. Lessons The SARCS local disaster response teams benefitted from their close working relationship with the local government and the provincial disaster management forums. The joint efforts ensured more directed identification and effective coverage of high risk areas. The partnership based approach made the affected communities part of the solution thereby allowing them to take ownership of their safety and welfare before, during and after disasters.

2 2 Although the implementation of the DREF was effective, SARCS still needs to develop responsive structures at all levels to meet the emergency provincial needs for future operations. The ideal set up would be to build a branch per district. More resources should be directed towards the development of community response teams and training on relationship building in order to co-exist and work hand in hand with local municipalities. More emphasis should be placed on risk reduction and preparedness in order to reduce and optimise the resources towards response activities. SARCS needs to be proactive in mobilising more local resources to spontaneously respond to any disaster occurrence. The Netherlands, Canadian and Belgian Red Cross/Governments contributed to the DREF in replenishment of the allocation made for this operation. The major donors and partners of DREF include the Red Cross Societies and governments of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the U.S.A., as well as DG- ECHO, the U.K. Department for International Development (DFID), the Medtronic and Z Zurich Foundations and other corporate and private donors. The IFRC, on behalf of the National Society, thanks all for their generous contributions. Details of contributions to DREF are found at: for 2010, and at: for <click here for the final financial report, or here to view contact details> The situation South Africa received above normal rainfall and flooding in early The floods caused unprecedented destruction, resulting in disruption in service delivery, displacement of people and loss of lives and livelihoods. Over 200,000 people were reportedly affected by floods and 40 deaths were reported. A national state of disaster was declared in 28 district municipalities in eight provinces. Through its branches, SARCS conducted provincial assessments of the damage caused by the floods and the outcome of the assessments was used to make decisions for rendering assistance to the affected people. SARCS launched two appeals, in the form of a DREF and a national appeal that were covered by the IFRC and the private sector respectively. The Free State, Limpopo, the North West and the Northern Cape were selected for the DREF as they were the provinces requiring the most urgent assistance. The remaining provinces were assisted under the private sector appeal. BHP Billiton contributed ZAR 18 million of the ZAR19.5 million that was pledged by the private sector. An additional ZAR 1.5 million was raised mostly from KPMG, Vodacom Foundation, Mutual and Federal and the Discovery Fund.

3 3 Red Cross and Red Crescent action The DREF request focused on disaster response and relief, emergency health and community based capacity building, supported by a well developed communications strategy. The DREF was implemented in the four provinces between February and April, and it was successfully concluded. The operations demonstrated the cooperation and positive impact of public-private partnership primarily between the private sector, government and SARCS. The partnership mobilised financial resources to facilitate field operations and distribution of food and non-food items. The partnership between SARCS and local government was strengthened, as together they implemented the relevant activities effectively and efficiently and ensured full coverage of the affected areas. This boosted confidence and favourably supported the provinces efforts to become autonomous and fully functional through their provincial structures. Distribution of the relief items coincided with the run-up to the local government elections, and efforts had to be directed at demonstrating the Red Cross neutrality stance under very challenging circumstances and allegations of political gifting, vote buying and interference. DREF implementation work had to be suspended and only resumed after the municipal elections. However, procurement of relief items as well as capital goods proceeded. Beneficiaries receiving relief items during distribution work being conducted by SARCS volunteers Achievements against planned outcomes The DREF request focused on disaster response and relief, emergency health and community based capacity building, supported by a well developed communications strategy. Disaster Preparedness and Response Relief distributions (food and basic non-food items) Outcome: To provide emergency assistance to 1,774 most flood affected families in four provinces for a period of three months Outputs and activities planned: Post-disaster needs assessments are conducted in all the affected provinces Mobilise enough volunteers to conduct relief distribution work Distribute food and non-food items in four of the most affected provinces of the country Provincial disaster management teams are strengthened Communities are assisted to rebuild their livelihoods Impact: Most of the estimated 92,202 South Africans affected by the floods live in informal and ad hoc settlements scattered throughout the country. Disaster Management teams in the Free State, Northern Province, North West, Gauteng, Limpopo Mpumalanga and the Western Cape were strengthened. The Kwa Zulu Natal province was able to resolve its disaster challenges, with minimal support from the SARCS National Office, as it had capacity. Assessments indicated that there was high demand for assistance. The need for support stretched into the winter months of The immediate needs of the identified beneficiaries were covered by the DREF. In addition to this, SARCS launched a national appeal which was used for the less affected provinces as well as assist communities to rebuild livelihoods and to build their resilience in the event of any future disasters. The Community Based Disaster Management approach was applied. In addition to 1,174 households reached through the DREF, another 10,000 households were reached with relief assistance in total. Through the DREF operation, in the Free State Province 423 households were targeted. In Khayelisha 323 households received 323, 323 s, 323 s and 646. In Thaba Nchu 100 households received 100, 100 s, 100 s and households were assisted in North West Province. One plastic bucket and a were distributed to each of the 132 households that were targeted in Ngaka Modiri District, Molemo Municipality and Mokgori

4 village. Households in Mokgori village were also given 264. In Moshawane village 131 households received 131 plastic buckets, 131 s, and 262 were distributed. In Mooi Nooi 231 vulnerable households received 231 s and 402. Food and were also distributed by the local municipality. The relief items were drawn from the donation from the Government of Botswana. In Phomolong 139 households were assisted with 139, 139 s, 139 hygiene packs and 278. In total, 976 households in the Northern Cape Province received assistance, and a number of districts were targeted. A total of 450 households in Barkley West in the Dikgatlhong District Municipality were given 450, 450 s, 450 s and 900. In Holpan 220 households received 220, 220 s, 220 s and households in Windsorton received 250, 250 s, 250 s and 500. In Gong Gong 40 households received 40, 40 s, 40 s and 80. In Pniel 16 households received 16, 16 s, 16 s and 32. The breakdown of the distributed food and non-food items in the Free State, Limpopo, North West and the Northern Cape is provided in Table 1: below. Table 2: Breakdown of relief distribution by province Province Item Purchased Quantity Purchased Number of beneficiaries reached Free State ,225 Limpopo water purification 2, North West ( including Phumolong) Northern Cape sachets ,014 1,014 1, ,250 5,070 Funds raised from the national appeal were used to procure additional food and non-food items that were allocated for affected households in the Eastern Cape, the Free State, Gauteng, Kwa Zulu Natal, Limpopo and the Northern Cape. Table 2: Relief items procured from local appeal and distribution by province Province Item Purchased Quantity Purchased Eastern Cape Free State Gauteng Kwa Zulu Natal Limpopo , , ,144 1,144 2,288 1, ,

5 5 Northern Cape 1,147 1,147 2,294 1,147 The government of Botswana donated food and non-food relief items and SARCS assisted with storage, transportation and distribution to the North West Province. In total, 1,027 households benefited from these relief items. Table 3: Breakdown of relief items donated by the Government of Botswana Relief Item Size Quantity Quantity Quantity of Total stock donated confirmed by stock loaded SARCS at damages warehouse White Star 12.5kg 1,000 1, ,003 Maize meal Mabele 10kg 2,000 2, ,975 (sorghum porridge meal) Botswana 5kg 1, Beans Samp 5kg 1,099 1, ,098 Corned Beef 300g x 6 carton 1,952 1, ,646 Blankets 1, in warehouse Cooking Oil 750 ml 1,960 1,908 1,908 Various protective clothing items were procured and distributed for use during construction activities. The list of these items is provided below. Table 4: Protective clothing procured Item Purchased Quantity Purchased Hats 400 Gilets ( Fishermans jackets) Gilets Water Boots 400 During the months preceding the floods, SARCS trained disaster response volunteers in the different provinces. These became team leaders during the floods in their localities. They took the lead in the assessment of the affected areas, and also assisted with the provision of first aid, basic health assistance and identification of health hazards as the disasters continued. The teams also distributed relief items. SARCS managed to procure and distribute food and non-food relief items to the affected communities in the Free State, Limpopo, the Northern Cape and the North West Provinces. Constraints or Challenges The current SARCS structures are not fully responsive to the various provincial and district needs. There are gaps in the capacity of the community response teams and this presents operational challenges in situations where they have to work hand in hand with local municipalities. Pre-positioning of stocks has become a perennial problem given the vastness of the country and the lack of warehousing facilities at SARCS, although branches have storerooms. During the May 2011 national elections SARCS deployed volunteers to polling stations to provide first aid services and distribution of relief distributions. However, this, to some extent has compromised the neutrality of SARCS as it has been misconstrued for political gifts and interference.

6 6 Emergency health Outcome: To reduce the risk of communicable and water-borne diseases through community based health activities, using the CBHFA approach Outputs (expected results) and activities planned: Distribution of 1,774 s that will include water treatment sachets; Undertake community awareness campaigns on prevention of communicable and waterborne diseases including cholera and malaria; Produce 50 toolkits for PHAST in emergencies; Train 180 volunteers on PHAST in emergencies; Train affected population on hygiene promotion; Train affected population on the safe use of water treatment chemicals (sachets/ tablets). Impact: The Disaster Management team in conjunction with the IFRC organised a training of trainers on PHAST, where 22 trainers were trained from across the country. These went on to train a further 122 volunteers on PHAST in all the other provinces. The South African Department of Health and SARCS jointly trained 30 volunteers in Limpopo on Malaria (Disease Outbreak Response). An additional 25 volunteers were trained per province in the Free State, Limpopo, the North West and the Northern Cape. Limpopo province distributed water purification sachets in response to the cholera cases registered there. Some water purification sachets were distributed in the Free State while a further 16,000 were distributed in the Northern Cape. Over and above the emergency health services required, long-term assistance was also needed for health, hygiene and water purification education. The three reported cholera cases in Limpopo increased SARCS s alertness and preparedness to implement prevention measures to combat its spread. SARCS also directed its efforts towards reducing the risk of communicable and water borne diseases through various community health activities using the CBHFA approach. All the volunteers involved in the DREF operation received some refresher training. Communication Outcome: to provide regular credible and reliable information to the public Outputs and planned activities Develop and implement a communication strategy to support humanitarian interventions create awareness and sound community relations, Impact: SARCS profiled the need for support of humanitarian interventions towards the floods in the print and electronic media. Audio visual material of the operation was developed. Opportunities for media interviews to publicize operations and create awareness were taken advantage of. Sound working relationships with the media houses were established for profiling community activities. Contact information For further information specifically related to this operation please contact: In South Africa: Winnie Ndebele, Acting Secretary General, Pretoria, phone: , wndebele@redcross.org.za IFRC Regional Representation: Mirkka Henttonen, Acting Regional Representative; phone: ; ; fax: ; ; mirkka.henttonen@ifrc.org IFRC Zone: Daniel Bolanos, Disaster Management Coordinator, Africa; phone: +27 (0) , mobile: +27 (0) ; daniel.bolanos@ifrc.org Geneva: Pablo Medina, Senior Officer, Operations Quality Assurance; phone: ; pablo.medina@ifrc.org Regional Logistics Unit (RLU): Kai Kettunen, Regional Logistics Delegate, phone , kai.kettunen@ifrc.org

7 7 For Resource Mobilization and Pledges: IFRC Zone: Pierre Kremer, Acting Head of Resource Mobilization; phone: ; For Performance and Accountability (planning, monitoring, evaluation and reporting) IFRC Zone: Robert Ondrusek, PMER/QA Delegate, Johannesburg; phone: ; Click here 1. DREF final financial report below (remaining balance of CHF 1,470 has been returned to DREF) 2. Click here to return to the title page How we work All IFRC assistance seeks to adhere to the Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in Disaster Relief and the Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response (Sphere) in delivering assistance to the most vulnerable. The IFRC s vision is to inspire, encourage, facilitate and promote at all times all forms of humanitarian activities by National Societies, with a view to preventing and alleviating human suffering, and thereby contributing to the maintenance and promotion of human dignity and peace in the world. The IFRC s work is guided by Strategy 2020 which puts forward three strategic aims: 1. Save lives, protect livelihoods, and strengthen recovery from disaster and crises. 2. Enable healthy and safe living. 3. Promote social inclusion and a culture of non-violence and peace.

8 International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies MDRZA005 - South Africa - Floods Appeal Launch Date: 31 jan 11 Appeal Timeframe: 31 jan 11 to 30 apr 11 FINAL Selected Parameters Reporting Timeframe 2011/1-2011/8 Budget Timeframe 2011/2-2011/4 Appeal MDRZA005 Budget APPEAL All figures are in Swiss Francs (CHF) I. Consolidated Funding Disaster Management Health and Social Services National Society Development Principles and Values Coordination TOTAL A. Budget 177, ,585 B. Opening Balance 0 0 Income Other Income DREF Allocations 236, ,780 C4. Other Income 236, ,780 C. Total Income = SUM(C1..C4) 236, ,780 D. Total Funding = B +C 236, ,780 Appeal Coverage 133% 133% II. Movement of Funds Disaster Management Health and Social Services National Society Development Principles and Values Coordination TOTAL B. Opening Balance 0 0 C. Income 236, ,780 E. Expenditure -235, ,310 F. Closing Balance = (B + C + E) 1,470 1,470 Prepared on 10/Oct/2011 Page 1 of 2

9 International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies MDRZA005 - South Africa - Floods Appeal Launch Date: 31 jan 11 Appeal Timeframe: 31 jan 11 to 30 apr 11 FINAL Selected Parameters Reporting Timeframe 2011/1-2011/8 Budget Timeframe 2011/2-2011/4 Appeal MDRZA005 Budget APPEAL All figures are in Swiss Francs (CHF) III. Consolidated Expenditure vs. Budget Account Groups Budget Disaster Management Health and Social Services National Society Development Expenditure Principles and Values Coordination TOTAL Variance A B A - B BUDGET (C) 177, ,585 Relief items, Construction, Supplies Clothing & Textiles 45,855 38,718 38,718 7,137 Food 35,220 69,997 69,997-34,777 Water, Sanitation & Hygiene 5,987 58,071 58,071-52,083 Medical & First Aid Teaching Materials 15,900 15,900 Utensils & Tools 5,322 5,322 Other Supplies & Services 33,263 33,263 Total Relief items, Construction, Sup 142, , ,786-24,489 Logistics, Transport & Storage Storage ,333 10,333-9,583 Distribution & Monitoring 5,250 7,388 7,388-2,138 Transport & Vehicles Costs 1, Total Logistics, Transport & Storage 7,275 18,033 18,033-10,758 Personnel National Staff National Society Staff 8,400 5,358 5,358 3,042 Volunteers 2,034 2,034-2,034 Total Personnel 9,300 7,391 7,391 1,909 Workshops & Training Workshops & Training 22,033 22,033-22,033 Total Workshops & Training 22,033 22,033-22,033 General Expenditure Travel 1, Information & Public Relations 4,125 5,671 5,671-1,546 Office Costs Communications 1, Financial Charges Other General Expenses Total General Expenditure 7,875 6,705 6,705 1,170 Indirect Costs Programme & Services Support Recov 10,839 14,362 14,362-3,523 Total Indirect Costs 10,839 14,362 14,362-3,523 TOTAL EXPENDITURE (D) 177, , ,310-57,725 VARIANCE (C - D) -57,725-57,725 Prepared on 10/Oct/2011 Page 2 of 2